Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Web.dev by Google

web.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 264 posts

Re: Web.dev by Google

#201

Post by jefftk »

arkitaip wrote: post #63
rocky1138 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Pagespeed once recommended that I enable gzip compression on an embedded Google map. https://johnrockefeller.net/google-pagespeed-_/

Most performance profilers will penalize you for embedding Google Analytics and Google Fonts because they have poor caching settings. What's so important about those resources that they can't be cached for longer periods?

There are two main reasons why short caching is helpful on tag scripts:

* Faster iteration time for developers: the more often you release updates the faster you can move. If your script has a one week cache lifetime then there's not much point in daily releases and any experiments you run will be really skewed.

* Quicker response to problems: if we push out a bad update that gets past our testing, the TTL we serve it with determines how long that will stick around in browser caches.

(Disclosure: I work at Google, on ads JS, and I previously worked on mod_pagespeed. Not speaking for Google, just myself.)

Re: Web.dev by Google

#203

Post by SquareWheel »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #199
SquareWheel wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Progressive enhancement is different than what the parent comment is suggesting. They are describing how to correctly write SPAs and other webapps. The reason progressive enhancement has fallen away is because Javascript support is now ubiquitous. Your browser has it. Your screen reader has it. Even web crawlers have it.

> The reason progressive enhancement has fallen away is because Javascript support is now ubiquitous. WP describes it as > Progressive enhancement is a strategy for web design that emphasizes core webpage content first. This strategy then progressively adds more nuanced and technically rigorous layers of presentation and features on top of the content as the end-user's browser/internet connection allow. The proposed…

If I understand your question, you're asking about adding functionality to a webapp to make it feel like a webpage rather than enhancing a page to add new features. The best two examples are actually mentioned above.

1. Using history.pushstate to intelligently add to page history for meaningful changes to the page. This ensures pressing "back" in your browser is still reliable.

2. Using server-side rendering on the first render. This keeps SPAs fast while the payload is being transferred.

Regarding Wikipedia's definition, that's a more broad definition than I'm used to seeing (speaking as a web developer). I've always heard it in reference to falling back gracefully from Javascript - usually with a tag.

Supporting mobile, weaker networks, accessibility, etc. fall into much larger categories. Many of these topics require their own discussion and best practices.

Those topics are of course still important today (if not even more so).

Re: Web.dev by Google

#204

Post by TomK32 »

bitofhope wrote: post #178

This is useless to me because I have a website, not a web application. I got a 46/100 on PWA which is astonishing because the site being tested is not a progressive web application at all. Imagine vim getting a 40/100 score in the category of web browsers. Weirdly good score. The accessibility audit is garbage as well. Apparently I should add an image to the site just so I can put an alt attribute in it. I should inc…

It even recommend the brand-new WebP format over PNG.

Only thing I changed after this audit was to use http2 on my server.

Re: Web.dev by Google

#205

Post by Touche »

svnpenn wrote: post #158
Touche wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bad take. By releasing tools like this it helps all websites, including Gmail, have the data on how to speed up their website.

Not really. Would you take webdev advice from a company where their own apps are memory hog/leaking garbage (Gmail)? At some point you need to call a square a square.

If you disagree with the advice on web.dev then that's fine. Call that out. Saying that the advice is wrong because another team in another building, maybe in another city or another country, built an app you don't like, is just wrong. This sort of ad hominem is beneath HN.

Re: Web.dev by Google

#206

Post by masswerk »

Regarding accessibility: Are skip links still a thing, or has this been superseded by landmark roles? Is there still an advantage in using a link as compared to selecting a region?

Edit: Meaning, if I have already a main region, does adding a skip link to main actually complicate things?

Re: Web.dev by Google

#207

Post by arendtio »

bitofhope wrote: post #178

This is useless to me because I have a website, not a web application. I got a 46/100 on PWA which is astonishing because the site being tested is not a progressive web application at all. Imagine vim getting a 40/100 score in the category of web browsers. Weirdly good score. The accessibility audit is garbage as well. Apparently I should add an image to the site just so I can put an alt attribute in it. I should inc…

You might want to brush up your knowledge on what a PWA actually is [1]. For example, that list contains 'Site works cross-browser'. I hope your website works cross-browser too ;-)

The only thing that sets apart a normal modern website (https, responsive, cross-browser, Each page has a URL) and a PWA is the ServiceWorker (and a few meta-tags). All the other aspects are more or less soft or minor aspects like "Page transitions don't feel like they block on the network".

This might sound pretty preachy, but in fact, I just want to give a better perspective on what PWAs are, so that they are not getting confused with the average single page JS bloat. Instead, PWA is more like best-practice (e.g. to avoid broken back buttons) paired with some mandatory tools.

[1]: https://developers.google.com/web/progressive-web-apps/check...

Re: Web.dev by Google

#208

Post by sandov »

danillonunes wrote: post #49
shinryuu wrote: post #42

I get that the site can't be reached.. ? Is it a valid site?

It has been a common practice for devs to setup a local DNS server that points any *.dev domain to localhost. Maybe you did it (or installed some tool that did it) and forgot.

>or installed some tool that did it

I would love to see an example of this. Software-gore.

Re: Web.dev by Google

#210

Post by e40 »

hanoz wrote: post #102
e40 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or the g suite admin console. Cripes, it's insanely frustrating to use.

Google seems to be increasingly giving the impression of collapsing under its own weight.

That's kinda what it feels like to me. Does g suite already have so much technical debt that they can't make it better? It's been this way since I started using it, more than a year ago.
Post reply on HN